Ekrem Imamoglu and the battle for Turkey’s democratic soul

At a time when authoritarian rulers are embraced and democratic leaders are sidelined, Turkey’s democracy is unraveling – slowly but unmistakably. What’s equally alarming is the muted reaction from those who once saw themselves as its allies.

The problem isn’t just the silence of the United States or the European Union, but what that silence reveals. The Trump administration’s “America First” doctrine – with its focus on transactional alliances, realpolitik, and short-term strategic gains – has abandoned any commitment to democratic principles. In this worldview, diplomacy is no longer guided by principles like the rule of law or human rights, but by influence peddling and deal-making.

This realist shift has since seeped into European policymaking. With democratic backsliding and rising far-right populism within their own borders, EU nations have turned inward, effectively abdicating their moral leadership abroad. The vacuum left behind has created a permissive global atmosphere – one in which autocrats are not only tolerated, but empowered.

Once considered a democratic role model for Muslim-majority countries, Turkey now stands at the edge of authoritarian consolidation. What was once called the “Turkish model” is now on life support. The decline didn’t happen overnight. It has been engineered step by step by a ruling group of status-quo establishment unwilling to relinquish power – even when faced with clear electoral defeats. At the center of this crisis is Istanbul’s mayor, Ekrem Imamoglu: a calm, reform-minded, and non-ideological figure who has become the primary challenge to the country’s entrenched leadership.

Imamoglu’s rise represents a rare form of political leadership in today’s polarized world. He practices what could be described as “democratic people-ism,” offering inclusive, consensus-driven governance rather than the divisive, winner-takes-all approach of authoritarian populists. He doesn’t traffic in culture wars or partisanship. Instead, he focuses on public service – transparency, tolerance, competence – and that, paradoxically, is what makes him most dangerous to the establishment.

The ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) has now lost four straight elections to Imamoglu, including a dramatic re-run of the 2019 Istanbul mayoral vote, which he won again – this time by a margin of over 800,000 votes. In 2024, he widened the gap, winning by more than a million and helping his party, the CHP (Republican People’s Party – the main opposition party in Turkey), sweep nearly all major Turkish cities. These were not just electoral victories – they were referendums on a political order that has become increasingly disconnected from its people.

In functional democracies, electoral loss prompts reform or reflection. In Turkey, it triggers repression. Since entering public office, Imamoglu has faced over a hundred investigations and a dozen lawsuits – an unmistakable campaign to disqualify him from the presidential race. His family companies were forcibly seized by state authorities. His university diploma was recently annulled in an overt attempt to delegitimize his credentials. Even infrastructure initiatives have been sabotaged: the central government blocked six applications to open a new metro line that would serve 4 million citizens across 10 stops in Istanbul. Pre-school childcare centers operated by the city were targeted. Public restaurants offering balanced meals for just $1 became politically controversial. Initiatives like free Wi-Fi, discounted student dormitories, and municipal scholarships – basic social equity programs – were dismissed by the AKP as threats rather than services.

These aren’t policy disagreements. They’re the tactics of an insecure regime unable to tolerate a functional, alternative model of governance – one rooted in service, not control.

In the AKP’s Turkey, core democratic values – pluralism, coexistence, rule of law – have become subversive. They are not just rejected; they are treated as existential threats. Any figure who embodies them, as Imamoglu does, becomes a target.

But the question is no longer why the AKP fears Imamoglu – it is why the West remains silent.

Despite its authoritarian turn, Turkey remains geostrategically vital. It controls access to the Black Sea through the Bosporus Strait. It serves as a gatekeeper for migrant flows into Europe. It balances both sides in the Ukraine war, maintaining ties with NATO and Moscow. It hosts critical operations on Syria, Gaza, and broader Middle Eastern diplomacy.

These assets have given Turkey significant leverage. Washington and Brussels tolerate Turkey’s domestic crackdowns in exchange for strategic alignment. The AKP has skillfully exploited this dynamic, positioning Turkey as “too strategic to confront.”

But this is short-termism at its most dangerous. What’s being traded is not just values, but long-term strategic coherence. If democracy fully collapses in Turkey, the consequences won’t stop at its borders. NATO will be forced to navigate the presence of a deeply authoritarian member. The EU’s credibility on democracy and enlargement will be further eroded. Worse, other illiberal regimes will take note – and take license.

What Western policymakers gain in immediate convenience, they lose in moral authority and global credibility. A Turkey stripped of checks and balances, devoid of judicial independence, and governed by loyalty over law will become not a pillar of regional stability, but a source of volatility – whether through neo-Ottomanist ambitions or internal unrest sparked by economic and political repression.

Supporting the AKP’s rule while ignoring its opposition and suffocating civic space is not neutrality. It is complicity. Imamoglu offers not just hope for Turkey, but a model for democratic renewal at a time when such models are in short supply. His direction embodies inclusion without populism, service without spectacle, and unity without uniformity. That he remains under constant legal and institutional assault – while Western leaders utter polite silence – is not just a Turkish scandal. It is a transatlantic failure.

If the West cannot support democratic actors in Turkey – a fellow NATO member, a key regional player – then what credibility can it possibly claim when speaking up for opposition figures in other parts of the world? The message becomes dangerously clear: democracy is only worth defending when it’s easy and cheap.

But democracy rarely dies all at once. It decays in quiet moments. It withers through compromise. It disappears not with a bang, but with the silence of its supposed allies.

A Turkey that is unpredictable, undemocratic, and authoritarian will not only undermine its own future but destabilize its region and weaken the international order. What may seem like strategic patience today will be viewed as strategic failure tomorrow – by its people, its neighbors, and history. 

Bilal Bilici is a member of Turkey’s Parliament, representing Adana province in the Grand National Assembly from the main opposition party – Republican People’s Party (CHP).